It's not for nothing that throughout Asia, indians are universally despised.
You really can't blame the Pakistani for not wanting to be associated with such people...
That would be the same Pakistan where women regularly have acid thrown in their faces? Or where democracy is a pipe dream?
Really, if you're going to find something bad to say about India, then you can find something bad to say about Pakistan, China (no democracy, countless human rights abuses), the US (Camp X-Ray, Iraq, execution of minors, poor social safety net) or even the Vatican (collaberation with the Nazis).
And by the way, people keep cows as pets in India because they're holy animals to members of the hindu faith. Killing a cow - even a sick one - would be considered sacrilege. Funny how you don't castigate people living on Park Avenue, NY who keep dogs as pets and spend thousands pampering their poodles while homeless people sleep out on the cold streets just a few blocks away.
I don't think that it was the crofters that were buying the pirate viewing cards.
For one thing, most of the highlands would have been outside the signal range of those terrestrial broadcast antennae that carried the ITV Digital signals - it's a bit pointless trying to pirate something when you can't receive a clear transmission, isn't it?
For another, the poster who pointed out this mass piracy in the first place said that " half the population of Scotland - where for some reason, this is especially rife - were using bent cards". Now, I'm not able to pull precise population density data of Scotland out of thin air but I expect that just like the rest of the UK (and especially Wales and Northern Ireland), the population of Scotland is heavily concentrated in major conurbations (ie, cities and towns).
Bottom line is this: the overwhelming majority of people using pirate viewing cards were living in urban areas not remote ones.
(BTW, I think you'll find that the median income for any given profession is higher in Scotland than it is in northern England. Scotland has been extremely successful at attracting inward investment, and has far more happening than the neighbouring areas south of the border. These aren't the kinds of things that you'll have learnt about in your history class but they are the kinds of things that effect the financial well-being of the local populations.)
...I haven't portrayed it that way at all. I merely mentioned that it's an area which still hasn't reached socioeconomic parity with some of its neighbours due to historical oppression. Your defensiveness in assuming I was saying something I wasn't, is very telling.
No, but what you did say was that the reason why ITV Digital was pirated so widely in Scotland was (directly or indirectly) because of the lasting effects of wars that took place well before the US was even established. Are you really suggesting that the piracy took place because of some subconsious resentment over conflicts that old rather than just plain self-interest?
In my personal experience (which, as an IT journalist is much probably broader than you'd give me credit for) people take advantage of pirate viewing cards for one reason and one reason only - because it lets them get something for almost nothing. It's a money thing, pure and simple.
Re:Thats just great!
on
Mirror, Mirror
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Just thank your lucky stars that it wasn't a Slashdot article about polished jugs.
Uh, I don't have to "go read up", I know my culture and my heritage quite well thank you. And perhaps you could illustrate just how the Battle of Culloden Moor, which took place well over 250 years ago, hangs over Anglo-Scottish relations today.
Really, I have no interest in whatever spin and bias your history professor at your US university had to add on the events that I've already outlined in my last reply to someone else in this thread.
I've lived, worked and vacationed in the very countries that you're talking about for over three decades and I've yet to meet a Scotsman who feels so aggrieved by events that took place anywhere from 257 to 700 years ago that he feels that it effects him today, or one who feels that Scotland is oppressed by England.
As I've already pointed out, the average Scotsman is better off than the average Englishman in many ways. Scottish students studying at Scottish universities pay no university tuition fees - the same isn't true of English students irrespective of where they study. In England, (if either the vendor or the purchaser decides to play silly games) housebuying can become a nightmare - in Scotland, the whole process is far more civilised. Health is another area where the Scottish are better off too.
Thanks to devolution and the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament, Scotland is largely governed in Scotland by Scottish MPs (SMPs) elected by Scottish constituencies,. This parliament sits and governs with complete independence from that in London, which also has Scottish MPs (MPs) sitting. In fact, right now there's the ridculous situation that MPs in London representing Scottish voters can decide what laws govern England alone (while similar laws effecting Scotland are decided by SMPs in Edinburgh).
Scotland isn't some backward nation like you would like to portray it. Perhaps you should get off your ass and check it out yourself if you don't believe me.
Either you are deliberately being an ass, or you have missed the blazingly obvious. He wasn't referring to modern Scotland/England. He was referring to the past 5 or 6 centuries, in which English monarchs have sent invading armies north repeatedly to crush the Scots. I don't know how history played out on your planet, but on our's, the English treated the Scots (and the Welsh, and the Irish) quite poorly in the past.
Uhhh, are you totally dumb? Edward I's last invasion was in 1303-05. Robert the Bruce rebelled against him though and was crowned Robert I of Scotland. By 1314, the English (now led by Edward II) had been driven out of Scotland. And in 1328, the Treaty of Edinburgh/Northampton recognised the independence of Scottish kingship.
Over the next four hundred years there were a few wars (some started by the English, some by the Scots) but, in an attempt to preserve peace between the two countries, the Scottish and English Parliaments passed the Act of Union in 1707, which recognised that the two kingdoms were ruled by one monarch once and for all. (They had been ruled as seperate kingdoms by one monarch since the time of James I of England - VI of Scotland - in 1603.)
However, some Jacobites refused to recognise that the Stuart monarchy had come to its end with the death of Queen Anne in 1714, and they didn't acknowledge George I's claim to the throne. Their dissention culminated in a rebellion led by Charles Edward Stuart, the Young Pretender (aka Bonnie Prince Charlie) and claimant to the British throne, who led the Scottish Highland army to a futile defeat in 1746. This time round, the Jacobites were the aggressors and advanced down through England as far as Derby before they were forced to retreat and were eventually defeated at Culloden Moor.
So, to recap, there's been little reason for the English and the Scottish to be at war since 1603, when a Scottish monarch took the vacant English throne. England certainly hasn't been invading Scotland at will for a very long time. Not exactly the same scenario you paint: "...the past 5 or 6 centuries, in which English monarchs have sent invading armies north repeatedly to crush the Scots". Ahem.
And, just like the rest of the rubbish spouted about Anglo-Scottish relations in the original parent post ("People with a lower median income", etc - totally not true) it's completely ridiculous to suggest that Scottish people were pirating ITV Digital because of Edward I's imperial ambitions or George I's succession to the throne.
Please, like I told the other guy, check your facts before you start to talk. I find it's a great help when trying to distinguish intelligence from stupidity.
OK, I'm feeding a troll here, but sometimes you've got to teach the idiots a thing or two?
Just how is Britain a fascist country? What makes it one? Because a private company decides to examine insurance claims in this manner? Because a RFID trial is occuring (and drawing local and national protest) at one supermarket on one pruduct? Because their are CCTVs monitoring things as mundane as passenger flow/safety on the London Underground, traffic jams on major roads and around major terrorist targets?
Wow, it's Nazi Germany all over again isn't it?
Forget about the fact that we've got a democratically-elected parliamentary government, a politically-independant judiciary and guaranteed human rights. Or that, by law, every company has to make it's electronic records on a customer available to that customer. Or that an organisation as respected as Amnesty International was started up in this very country to help promote human rights worldwide. No, those things aren't at all proof that Britain isn't a fascist state, they're just figments of my imagination.
Compare and contrast with the US (which is where I bet you come from) and a flawed democratic process (Florida 2000, California 2003 are nice examples), companies aren't required to disclose a damn thing that they have on you (so who knows how inaccurate your bank's details on you are?), the USA PATRIOT Act is law, and minors can be executed at the state's pleasure.
Seriously, every country has it's pros and cons. Every society has its ills. But fascism isn't one of Britain's. If it is, then it sure is one of the US's too.
A nation the English have treated very well in the last few centuries. No wonder they weren't paying for overpriced satellite services. People with a lower median income than their neighbours will naturally not be as willing to pay as often for disposable entertainment. Blame that for the collapse of ITV rather than the piracy itself. It's not like most of those people would have actually paid for the service even if the piracy weren't relatively easy.
Jeez, where do I start? Where are you getting your in-depth knowledge of the relationship between Scotland and England from? Braveheart and Rob Roy? Have you even been to Britain?
"Lower median income than their neighbours"? Do you have any idea about how affluent cities like Glasgow and Edinburgh are compared to their counterparts in the north of England, say Newcastle, Sunderland and Carlisle? Have you even heard of Carlisle?
Anyone reading your post is left with the impression that the relationship between Scotland and England is like the relationship between Israel and the West Bank/Gaza Strip. The fact is, apart from a few minor differences, most of which favour the average Scotsman rather than the average Englishman (such as university education funding, legal procedures and house buying - all superior in Scotland) there are few differences between living in England and living in Scotland.
Next time, before you open your mouth about other cultures and societies, please have a clue about what you're talking about. It might help you come across as intelligent rather than stupid.
...but it strikes me that these reviews of PSUs aren't as accurate as they should be. I'm not wanting to run the guys at AnandTech or elsewhere down (because, most of the time, they do a great job) but it strikes me that, when you look at PSUs (as opposed to CPUs, graphics cards or HDDs) then perhaps testing just one sample of each product is flawed.
After all, some of the measurements taken to distinguish good from bad were to the fifth significant figure. It strikes me that if you have to be that precise to differentiate between the winners and the also-rans then you've got to test more than one of each PSU - three would be a minimum, five or more would be better - and average out the test results to give you figures that are more representative of the quality of these products.
After all, not every Zalman ZM400A-APF is going to have a 12V min/max fluctuation of only 0.005V, and not every Enermax EG651P-VE FMA 550W is going to have a fluctuaction of 0.65V. Who knows, perhaps this was just a particularly good Zalman and a particularly bad Enermax? Testing more units means accurate results, which is a good thing.
I appreciate that testing three (or five, or however many) of each PSU means more work - you have to get x many more of each unit, test x many more times, process x much more data before averaging out your results - but, sometimes, I think it's warranted. Without wanting to get down on anyone, I'd like to suggest that, where called for, they try to source more units and test more thoroughly.
And, before people start flaming me for not knowing what I'm talking about, how much work is involved, etc, let me just say that I've run a review lab and I do know what I'm talking about, how much work is involved, etc. It's not a trivial amount but, sometimes, it is worth it.
(No doubt that's just a cue for half a dozen people to tell me where I'm wrong. I welcome objective criticisms but you can keep any childish flames.)
Although SIP is commonplace their own website suggests that this particular phone won't work with other VoIP solutions. If that's true, then this project is destined to fail.
Imagine that you started up a mobile phone company right now, once the market is already well populated with providers, but that your users could only call other users on the same network. How long do you think it would be before you folded?
Even if this phone does work with other SIP/VoIP products what is there to differentiate it from the crowd? Nothing that I can see, so please enlighten me.
That's a maybe but this product isn't the first to market is it?
There are already lots of VoIP solutions out there, and how does this "me too" product differ from the crowd? What killer features does it have? None that I can see.
If anything, it has a major, probably fatal, drawback - only working with similar phones.
OK, so people carrying out long-distance relationships might like it but what about the rest of us? What's in it for Joe Average?
Just how are you going to prove that someone is running Red Hat, SuSE or any other flavour of Linux on one, one hundred or even one hundred thousand machines?
How are you going to prove that they're running an OS on one CPU or two?
What about all those stand-alone systems that aren't even connected to the internet?
What about people who have a Knoppix CD?
These are the kind of questions that SCO really hasn't thought through.
$699 for an OS that runs on 486 hardware? That much to run an Os on a machine that might have cost only a tenth of that or have been a charitable donation?
You can go after the vendors or you can go after the end-users, you can't go after both.
Double dipping like this is a joke. I'm sure SCO's lawyers justify this by saying it's analogous to selling stolen goods and then receiving stolen goods but, assuming for a second that SCO's claims are valid, if a Linux distributor like Red Hat or SuSE settles up shouldn't that settlement cover their existing customers? If not, why do those customers have to license the software twice?
Makes you long for the good old days of instance justice - if this was the Wild West, someone would have put a bullet in SCO's back a long time ago.
I can type the Pound and Euro symbols on my keyboard so I should be able to include them into a damn comment without worrying about how Slashcode treats them.
Just because something can be exploited it doesn't mean shutting it down completely. Email can be exploited in countless ways but we still use it don't we?
BT screwed me once too often too. Back in 1996/1997, they were quite happy to charge me 1.6 pence per minute (about $1 per hour) on top of the GBP15 per month I was paying to my ISP for internet access - and that was during the middle of the night. Not only that, but because I was using exceeding their expected usage, they were billing me every 6 weeks or so, rather than every 3 months.
They were quite happy to make GBP20-30 per week from me in internet call charges alone then, but were damn quick to terminate my supposedly unlimited BTOpenWorld Anytime service without any warning when I exceeded their arbitrary daily usage quota (12 hours IIRC).
So I decided then and there to cut them off for good and, when I moved into my new home, I called Telewest to have their phone and broadband services installed. Given a choice, I'll never use BT again.
BT may not have a monopoly any more but they sure act as if they do. And, as I've got a choice (sorry that you don't) I'm chosing not to give my money to a company that's only interested in what it can take from me rather than what it can do for me.
Damn stupid coders/editors. Slashcode's accepted pound signs quite happily until now so why change it?
Correct me if I'm wrong but they're not just screwing people who want to post pound signs to Slashdot, they're also screwing people who want to run slashcode elsewhere.
And it's not just the pound sign that's affected - the Yen and Euro currency symbols are also unavailable now.
So you like David Gray? Well, that's something that we have in common then.
I've bought six David Gray albums - The EP's 92-94, Lost Songs 95-98, Flesh, Sell, Sell, Sell, White Ladder and A New Day At Midnight - and I enjoy them all immensly. I also enjoy seeing him in concert too.
How many of those albums do you have? How many of the 65 tracks do you have? If you're answer to either question is one or more then how can you justify downloading rather than buying his music?
It's definitely not because his CDs can't be ripped to MP3/Ogg/whatever - I've got all six of those albums ripped to my hard disk as high-quality VBR MP3s.
Bringing up the resale market is a nice way to deflect the issue, which is that you have no intention of buying CDs when you can download the music for free.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not for nothing that throughout Asia, indians are universally despised.
You really can't blame the Pakistani for not wanting to be associated with such people...
That would be the same Pakistan where women regularly have acid thrown in their faces? Or where democracy is a pipe dream?
Really, if you're going to find something bad to say about India, then you can find something bad to say about Pakistan, China (no democracy, countless human rights abuses), the US (Camp X-Ray, Iraq, execution of minors, poor social safety net) or even the Vatican (collaberation with the Nazis).
And by the way, people keep cows as pets in India because they're holy animals to members of the hindu faith. Killing a cow - even a sick one - would be considered sacrilege. Funny how you don't castigate people living on Park Avenue, NY who keep dogs as pets and spend thousands pampering their poodles while homeless people sleep out on the cold streets just a few blocks away.
I don't think that it was the crofters that were buying the pirate viewing cards.
For one thing, most of the highlands would have been outside the signal range of those terrestrial broadcast antennae that carried the ITV Digital signals - it's a bit pointless trying to pirate something when you can't receive a clear transmission, isn't it?
For another, the poster who pointed out this mass piracy in the first place said that " half the population of Scotland - where for some reason, this is especially rife - were using bent cards". Now, I'm not able to pull precise population density data of Scotland out of thin air but I expect that just like the rest of the UK (and especially Wales and Northern Ireland), the population of Scotland is heavily concentrated in major conurbations (ie, cities and towns).
Bottom line is this: the overwhelming majority of people using pirate viewing cards were living in urban areas not remote ones.
(BTW, I think you'll find that the median income for any given profession is higher in Scotland than it is in northern England. Scotland has been extremely successful at attracting inward investment, and has far more happening than the neighbouring areas south of the border. These aren't the kinds of things that you'll have learnt about in your history class but they are the kinds of things that effect the financial well-being of the local populations.)
...I haven't portrayed it that way at all. I merely mentioned that it's an area which still hasn't reached socioeconomic parity with some of its neighbours due to historical oppression. Your defensiveness in assuming I was saying something I wasn't, is very telling.
No, but what you did say was that the reason why ITV Digital was pirated so widely in Scotland was (directly or indirectly) because of the lasting effects of wars that took place well before the US was even established. Are you really suggesting that the piracy took place because of some subconsious resentment over conflicts that old rather than just plain self-interest?
In my personal experience (which, as an IT journalist is much probably broader than you'd give me credit for) people take advantage of pirate viewing cards for one reason and one reason only - because it lets them get something for almost nothing. It's a money thing, pure and simple.
Just thank your lucky stars that it wasn't a Slashdot article about polished jugs.
Never take recommendations from anyone who spells the word with two c's and just one m.
Laugh stupid, it's a joke.
Uh, I don't have to "go read up", I know my culture and my heritage quite well thank you. And perhaps you could illustrate just how the Battle of Culloden Moor, which took place well over 250 years ago, hangs over Anglo-Scottish relations today.
Really, I have no interest in whatever spin and bias your history professor at your US university had to add on the events that I've already outlined in my last reply to someone else in this thread.
I've lived, worked and vacationed in the very countries that you're talking about for over three decades and I've yet to meet a Scotsman who feels so aggrieved by events that took place anywhere from 257 to 700 years ago that he feels that it effects him today, or one who feels that Scotland is oppressed by England.
As I've already pointed out, the average Scotsman is better off than the average Englishman in many ways. Scottish students studying at Scottish universities pay no university tuition fees - the same isn't true of English students irrespective of where they study. In England, (if either the vendor or the purchaser decides to play silly games) housebuying can become a nightmare - in Scotland, the whole process is far more civilised. Health is another area where the Scottish are better off too.
Thanks to devolution and the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament, Scotland is largely governed in Scotland by Scottish MPs (SMPs) elected by Scottish constituencies,. This parliament sits and governs with complete independence from that in London, which also has Scottish MPs (MPs) sitting. In fact, right now there's the ridculous situation that MPs in London representing Scottish voters can decide what laws govern England alone (while similar laws effecting Scotland are decided by SMPs in Edinburgh).
Scotland isn't some backward nation like you would like to portray it. Perhaps you should get off your ass and check it out yourself if you don't believe me.
Either you are deliberately being an ass, or you have missed the blazingly obvious. He wasn't referring to modern Scotland/England. He was referring to the past 5 or 6 centuries, in which English monarchs have sent invading armies north repeatedly to crush the Scots. I don't know how history played out on your planet, but on our's, the English treated the Scots (and the Welsh, and the Irish) quite poorly in the past.
Uhhh, are you totally dumb? Edward I's last invasion was in 1303-05. Robert the Bruce rebelled against him though and was crowned Robert I of Scotland. By 1314, the English (now led by Edward II) had been driven out of Scotland. And in 1328, the Treaty of Edinburgh/Northampton recognised the independence of Scottish kingship.
Over the next four hundred years there were a few wars (some started by the English, some by the Scots) but, in an attempt to preserve peace between the two countries, the Scottish and English Parliaments passed the Act of Union in 1707, which recognised that the two kingdoms were ruled by one monarch once and for all. (They had been ruled as seperate kingdoms by one monarch since the time of James I of England - VI of Scotland - in 1603.)
However, some Jacobites refused to recognise that the Stuart monarchy had come to its end with the death of Queen Anne in 1714, and they didn't acknowledge George I's claim to the throne. Their dissention culminated in a rebellion led by Charles Edward Stuart, the Young Pretender (aka Bonnie Prince Charlie) and claimant to the British throne, who led the Scottish Highland army to a futile defeat in 1746. This time round, the Jacobites were the aggressors and advanced down through England as far as Derby before they were forced to retreat and were eventually defeated at Culloden Moor.
So, to recap, there's been little reason for the English and the Scottish to be at war since 1603, when a Scottish monarch took the vacant English throne. England certainly hasn't been invading Scotland at will for a very long time. Not exactly the same scenario you paint: "...the past 5 or 6 centuries, in which English monarchs have sent invading armies north repeatedly to crush the Scots". Ahem.
And, just like the rest of the rubbish spouted about Anglo-Scottish relations in the original parent post ("People with a lower median income", etc - totally not true) it's completely ridiculous to suggest that Scottish people were pirating ITV Digital because of Edward I's imperial ambitions or George I's succession to the throne.
Please, like I told the other guy, check your facts before you start to talk. I find it's a great help when trying to distinguish intelligence from stupidity.
OK, I'm feeding a troll here, but sometimes you've got to teach the idiots a thing or two?
Just how is Britain a fascist country? What makes it one? Because a private company decides to examine insurance claims in this manner? Because a RFID trial is occuring (and drawing local and national protest) at one supermarket on one pruduct? Because their are CCTVs monitoring things as mundane as passenger flow/safety on the London Underground, traffic jams on major roads and around major terrorist targets?
Wow, it's Nazi Germany all over again isn't it?
Forget about the fact that we've got a democratically-elected parliamentary government, a politically-independant judiciary and guaranteed human rights. Or that, by law, every company has to make it's electronic records on a customer available to that customer. Or that an organisation as respected as Amnesty International was started up in this very country to help promote human rights worldwide. No, those things aren't at all proof that Britain isn't a fascist state, they're just figments of my imagination.
Compare and contrast with the US (which is where I bet you come from) and a flawed democratic process (Florida 2000, California 2003 are nice examples), companies aren't required to disclose a damn thing that they have on you (so who knows how inaccurate your bank's details on you are?), the USA PATRIOT Act is law, and minors can be executed at the state's pleasure.
Seriously, every country has it's pros and cons. Every society has its ills. But fascism isn't one of Britain's. If it is, then it sure is one of the US's too.
> half the population of Scotland
A nation the English have treated very well in the last few centuries. No wonder they weren't paying for overpriced satellite services. People with a lower median income than their neighbours will naturally not be as willing to pay as often for disposable entertainment. Blame that for the collapse of ITV rather than the piracy itself. It's not like most of those people would have actually paid for the service even if the piracy weren't relatively easy.
Jeez, where do I start? Where are you getting your in-depth knowledge of the relationship between Scotland and England from? Braveheart and Rob Roy? Have you even been to Britain?
"Lower median income than their neighbours"? Do you have any idea about how affluent cities like Glasgow and Edinburgh are compared to their counterparts in the north of England, say Newcastle, Sunderland and Carlisle? Have you even heard of Carlisle?
Anyone reading your post is left with the impression that the relationship between Scotland and England is like the relationship between Israel and the West Bank/Gaza Strip. The fact is, apart from a few minor differences, most of which favour the average Scotsman rather than the average Englishman (such as university education funding, legal procedures and house buying - all superior in Scotland) there are few differences between living in England and living in Scotland.
Next time, before you open your mouth about other cultures and societies, please have a clue about what you're talking about. It might help you come across as intelligent rather than stupid.
GnuCash? What was wrong with the old stuff?
This could be useful for those cases where Google just refuses to return the search results you want.
How could you say that! Google works great, especially for, images!
...but it strikes me that these reviews of PSUs aren't as accurate as they should be. I'm not wanting to run the guys at AnandTech or elsewhere down (because, most of the time, they do a great job) but it strikes me that, when you look at PSUs (as opposed to CPUs, graphics cards or HDDs) then perhaps testing just one sample of each product is flawed.
After all, some of the measurements taken to distinguish good from bad were to the fifth significant figure. It strikes me that if you have to be that precise to differentiate between the winners and the also-rans then you've got to test more than one of each PSU - three would be a minimum, five or more would be better - and average out the test results to give you figures that are more representative of the quality of these products.
After all, not every Zalman ZM400A-APF is going to have a 12V min/max fluctuation of only 0.005V, and not every Enermax EG651P-VE FMA 550W is going to have a fluctuaction of 0.65V. Who knows, perhaps this was just a particularly good Zalman and a particularly bad Enermax? Testing more units means accurate results, which is a good thing.
I appreciate that testing three (or five, or however many) of each PSU means more work - you have to get x many more of each unit, test x many more times, process x much more data before averaging out your results - but, sometimes, I think it's warranted. Without wanting to get down on anyone, I'd like to suggest that, where called for, they try to source more units and test more thoroughly.
And, before people start flaming me for not knowing what I'm talking about, how much work is involved, etc, let me just say that I've run a review lab and I do know what I'm talking about, how much work is involved, etc. It's not a trivial amount but, sometimes, it is worth it.
(No doubt that's just a cue for half a dozen people to tell me where I'm wrong. I welcome objective criticisms but you can keep any childish flames.)
No it dosn't.
Funny how, in a post joking about Latin spelling and grammar, you manage to misspell a simple word.
Although SIP is commonplace their own website suggests that this particular phone won't work with other VoIP solutions. If that's true, then this project is destined to fail.
Imagine that you started up a mobile phone company right now, once the market is already well populated with providers, but that your users could only call other users on the same network. How long do you think it would be before you folded?
Even if this phone does work with other SIP/VoIP products what is there to differentiate it from the crowd? Nothing that I can see, so please enlighten me.
That's a maybe but this product isn't the first to market is it?
There are already lots of VoIP solutions out there, and how does this "me too" product differ from the crowd? What killer features does it have? None that I can see.
If anything, it has a major, probably fatal, drawback - only working with similar phones.
OK, so people carrying out long-distance relationships might like it but what about the rest of us? What's in it for Joe Average?
...then it's doomed already.
Just how are you going to prove that someone is running Red Hat, SuSE or any other flavour of Linux on one, one hundred or even one hundred thousand machines?
How are you going to prove that they're running an OS on one CPU or two?
What about all those stand-alone systems that aren't even connected to the internet?
What about people who have a Knoppix CD?
These are the kind of questions that SCO really hasn't thought through.
$699 for an OS that runs on 486 hardware? That much to run an Os on a machine that might have cost only a tenth of that or have been a charitable donation?
Really, these guys are bordering on insane.
You can go after the vendors or you can go after the end-users, you can't go after both.
Double dipping like this is a joke. I'm sure SCO's lawyers justify this by saying it's analogous to selling stolen goods and then receiving stolen goods but, assuming for a second that SCO's claims are valid, if a Linux distributor like Red Hat or SuSE settles up shouldn't that settlement cover their existing customers? If not, why do those customers have to license the software twice?
Makes you long for the good old days of instance justice - if this was the Wild West, someone would have put a bullet in SCO's back a long time ago.
I can type the Pound and Euro symbols on my keyboard so I should be able to include them into a damn comment without worrying about how Slashcode treats them.
Just because something can be exploited it doesn't mean shutting it down completely. Email can be exploited in countless ways but we still use it don't we?
Shhh, don't tell people about Google. It was meant to be our little secret.
The sweet sound of silence?
Simon and Garfunkel and sugar on top? I gotta get me one of those ASAP...
BT screwed me once too often too. Back in 1996/1997, they were quite happy to charge me 1.6 pence per minute (about $1 per hour) on top of the GBP15 per month I was paying to my ISP for internet access - and that was during the middle of the night. Not only that, but because I was using exceeding their expected usage, they were billing me every 6 weeks or so, rather than every 3 months.
They were quite happy to make GBP20-30 per week from me in internet call charges alone then, but were damn quick to terminate my supposedly unlimited BTOpenWorld Anytime service without any warning when I exceeded their arbitrary daily usage quota (12 hours IIRC).
So I decided then and there to cut them off for good and, when I moved into my new home, I called Telewest to have their phone and broadband services installed. Given a choice, I'll never use BT again.
BT may not have a monopoly any more but they sure act as if they do. And, as I've got a choice (sorry that you don't) I'm chosing not to give my money to a company that's only interested in what it can take from me rather than what it can do for me.
Damn stupid coders/editors. Slashcode's accepted pound signs quite happily until now so why change it?
Correct me if I'm wrong but they're not just screwing people who want to post pound signs to Slashdot, they're also screwing people who want to run slashcode elsewhere.
And it's not just the pound sign that's affected - the Yen and Euro currency symbols are also unavailable now.
Great job guys. Not.
KI Kdon't Kknow Khow Kyou Kcould Kpossibly Ksay Kthat!
So you like David Gray? Well, that's something that we have in common then.
I've bought six David Gray albums - The EP's 92-94, Lost Songs 95-98, Flesh, Sell, Sell, Sell, White Ladder and A New Day At Midnight - and I enjoy them all immensly. I also enjoy seeing him in concert too.
How many of those albums do you have? How many of the 65 tracks do you have? If you're answer to either question is one or more then how can you justify downloading rather than buying his music?
It's definitely not because his CDs can't be ripped to MP3/Ogg/whatever - I've got all six of those albums ripped to my hard disk as high-quality VBR MP3s.
Bringing up the resale market is a nice way to deflect the issue, which is that you have no intention of buying CDs when you can download the music for free.